On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 07:54:42AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 02:03:55PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > We worked pretty closely with different LDAP teams and the way FAS works
> > is just not very... ldapian. Although it's only some internal stuff that
> > we need (specifically related to our user/sponsor/admin bits in each
> > group.
> Can't this be implemented with a FAS ldap schema that contains these
> bits in ldap attributes?
> Or rephrased: Can't any SQL field in a table be always mapped onto
> some (custom) ldap attribute? If you can map a problem onto an SQL
> database it should be possible to go ldap IMHO.
Seems like it should work that way, and we spent months trying to get it
to work right (even working with the fedora-ds people) but it just ended
up being very hacky and not very good.
Maybe if someone gives some detail on why the LDAP setup looked like
too hacky we could find a better solution and use LDAP?
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net